No. It's not. It's clearly based off an NSA story they didn't investigate, esp if you know req 702 training at time. Zero Q.
-
-
Replying to @emptywheel
I'll take a look at the Gellman piece which I haven't read yet, but like I said, I'm reserving judgement
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MiekeEoyang
Have you read my piece? Based on unclassified NSA docs? https://www.emptywheel.net/2016/09/15/if-snowden-doesnt-know-privacy-protections-of-702-thats-a-problem-with-nsa-training/ …
1 reply 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
yeah I did. Not being privvy to implementation, i don't know specifics. But, in my experience many kinds of training on programs
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @emptywheel @MiekeEoyang
It's simple. Either he was lying in prep for comms to Adm Rogers, or Snowden ultimately passed that. Very very simple.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
No, I think you may be making assumptions about what constitutes training that may not be accurate. But I don't know, which
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MiekeEoyang
So now you're accusing NSA IG of being mistaken? All other oversight fails so HPSCI doesn't?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
no I'm not. I'm just saying there may be more to this story that explains the discrepancy and not assuming malice.
4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MiekeEoyang @emptywheel
I'm not looking at the report while writing, since I'm not at the office. And am not going to get worked up about it yet.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Sure. But it's clear that HPSCI report conflicts with that FOIAed docs say. So maybe SV head was wrong in prep to Rogers...
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.